IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/mateco/v59y2015icp47-57.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multiagent belief revision

Author

Listed:
  • Billot, Antoine
  • Vergnaud, Jean-Christophe
  • Walliser, Bernard

Abstract

An original epistemic framework is proposed for the modeling of beliefs and messages within a multiagent belief setting. This framework enables public, private and secret messages as well, even when the latter contains errors. A revising rule—i.e. the product rule—is introduced in pure epistemic terms in order to be applied to all structures and message. Since any syntactic structure can be expressed through various semantic ones, an equivalence principle is given by use of the semantic notion of bisimilarity. Thereafter, a robustness result proves that, for a given prior structure, bisimilar messages yield bisimilar posterior structures (Theorem 1). In syntax, the beliefs revised thanks to the product rule are then shown to be unique (Theorem 2). Finally, an equivalence theorem is established between the product rule and the Belief-Message Inference axiom (Theorem 3).

Suggested Citation

  • Billot, Antoine & Vergnaud, Jean-Christophe & Walliser, Bernard, 2015. "Multiagent belief revision," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 47-57.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:mateco:v:59:y:2015:i:c:p:47-57
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jmateco.2015.05.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304406815000543
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jmateco.2015.05.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giacomo Bonanno, 2004. "A simple modal logic for belief revision," Working Papers 164, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    2. Perea,Andrés, 2012. "Epistemic Game Theory," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107401396.
    3. Perea,Andrés, 2012. "Epistemic Game Theory," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107008915.
    4. Geanakoplos, John D. & Polemarchakis, Heraklis M., 1982. "We can't disagree forever," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 192-200, October.
    5. Giacomo Bonanno, 2004. "A simple modal logic for belief revision," Working Papers 45, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    6. Board, Oliver, 2004. "Dynamic interactive epistemology," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 49-80, October.
    7. John Geanakoplos, 1989. "Game Theory Without Partitions, and Applications to Speculation and Consensus," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 914, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Antoine Billot & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud & Bernard Walliser, 2008. "Multiplayer belief revision," Post-Print halshs-00344461, HAL.
    2. Áron Tóbiás, 2021. "Meet meets join: the interaction between pooled and common knowledge," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 50(4), pages 989-1019, December.
    3. Giacomo Bonanno, 2007. "Four Logics for Minimal Belief Revision," Working Papers 76, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    4. Giacomo Bonanno, 2012. "Epistemic foundations of game theory," Working Papers 70, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    5. Giacomo Bonanno, 2007. "Four Logics for Minimal Belief Revision," Working Papers 209, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    6. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2018. "Bayesian game theorists and non-Bayesian players," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(6), pages 1420-1454, November.
    7. Giacomo Bonanno, 2005. "Temporal interaction of information and belief," Working Papers 541, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    8. Giacomo Bonanno, 2005. "Temporal interaction of information and belief," Working Papers 141, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    9. John Geanakoplos, 1993. "Common Knowledge," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1062, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    10. Sanjit Dhami & Emma Manifold & Ali al‐Nowaihi, 2021. "Identity and Redistribution: Theory and Evidence," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(350), pages 499-531, April.
    11. Pierfrancesco Guarino & Gabriel Ziegler, 2022. "Strategic Behavior under Context Misalignment," Papers 2205.00564, arXiv.org.
    12. Tsakas, Elias, 2014. "Epistemic equivalence of extended belief hierarchies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 126-144.
    13. Heifetz, Aviad & Meier, Martin & Schipper, Burkhard C., 2019. "Comprehensive rationalizability," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 185-202.
    14. Gilboa, Itzhak & Samuelson, Larry & Schmeidler, David, 2022. "Learning (to disagree?) in large worlds," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    15. Joseph Y. Halpern & Yoram Moses, 2017. "Characterizing solution concepts in terms of common knowledge of rationality," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(2), pages 457-473, May.
    16. Spyros Galanis, 2013. "Unawareness of theorems," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(1), pages 41-73, January.
    17. Lorenzo Bastianello & Mehmet S. Ismail, 2022. "Rationality and correctness in n-player games," Papers 2209.09847, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    18. Tsakas, E., 2012. "Rational belief hierarchies," Research Memorandum 004, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    19. Shuige Liu, 2018. "Ordered Kripke Model, Permissibility, and Convergence of Probabilistic Kripke Model," Papers 1801.08767, arXiv.org.
    20. Perea, Andrés & Roy, Souvik, 2017. "A new epistemic characterization of ε-proper rationalizability," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 309-328.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:mateco:v:59:y:2015:i:c:p:47-57. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jmateco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.